The Scottish Fire and Rescue Service (SFRS) have announced a programme of £11 million worth of cuts for 2023-24, which could lead to catastrophic removals of equipment and firefighter positions at fire stations.
Crewe Toll Fire Station in Edinburgh is due to be affected, with the potential loss of the station’s Turntable Ladder, the piece of equipment which allows rescues from height.
If the equipment is removed from the station, and if no other height appliance was available to attend, there would be no external rescue possible from above the fourth floor in a building.
Foysol Choudhury MSP this week visited Crewe Toll Fire Station to discuss the impact that these cuts would have on the firefighters and their ability to do their job safely.
Following the visit, Mr Choudhury said: “Firefighters risk their lives doing their jobs to save us, and our buildings, from fire.
“They depend on vital equipment to help them do this safely and so I am incredibly concerned that this equipment could be removed, meaning that rescues from height will not be possible.
“With over 50 buildings above four floors in the surrounding area, this proposal makes no sense.
“If there is a fire in a block of flats in the area surrounding Crewe Toll, what will happen?
“These cuts should not be made, knowing the dangers that fires can cause and the tragedies they lead to.
“You can sign the petition to help Crewe Toll Fire Station retain their height appliance here: https://chng.it/CJncjdvty7”
The Labour list MSP is supporting FBU Scotland’s #CutsLeaveScars campaign, which is calling for a reverse to the decision to cut £11million from services.
Mr Choudhury is also calling on the Scottish Government to urgently review their funding arrangements with the SFRS, so that these cuts are not forced and so that both firefighters and the public can be kept safe by a fully resourced fire and rescue service.
In a major defeat for the Conservative government, the High Court yesterday (Thursday) ruled that its agency worker regulations are unlawful, after a successful legal challenge by trade unions, coordinated by the TUC.
The “strike-breaking” regulations were brought in last summer and allow agencies to supply employers with workers to fill in for those on strike.
The High Court ruled that the then Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, Kwasi Kwarteng, failed to consult unions, as required by the Employment Agencies Act 1973 – quashing the 2022 changes.
Eleven trade unions, coordinated by the TUC and represented by Thompsons Solicitors LLP, brought legal proceedings against the government’s changes to agency worker regulations in a bid to protect the right to strike.
The unions – ASLEF, BFAWU, FDA, GMB, NEU, NUJ, POA, PCS, RMT, Unite and Usdaw – come from a wide range of sectors and represent millions of workers in the UK.
Unison and NASUWT also brought separate legal challenges against the laws.
The TUC says the ruling is a “badge of shame” for the Conservative government – and a “major blow” to “ministers’ attempts to undermine the right to strike”.
In addition to these agency worker regulations brought in last summer, ministers are currently rushing through the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill, which is currently making its way through parliament.
This could lead to workers being forced to work even when they have democratically voted to strike, and workers facing the sack if they refuse to comply.
Damning assessment
The Court was damning in its assessment of ministers’ failure to consult – and in particular, the conduct of the former Secretary of State for Business, Kwasi Kwarteng.
The judgment says “the Secretary of State’s approach was contrary to section 12 (2) of the 1973 Act, so unfair as to be unlawful and, indeed, irrational.”
The judgment goes onto say “the approach of Mr Kwarteng was to commit to the revocation of regulation 7 at a time when the advice to him was that it would be of negligible short-term benefit and probably be counterproductive.”
Heavy criticism
The change in agency worker regulations was heavily criticised by unions, agency employers, and parliamentarians.
The TUC has warned these new laws could worsen industrial disputes, undermine the fundamental right to strike and endanger public safety if agency staff are required to fill safety critical roles but haven’t been fully trained.
The Recruitment and Employment Confederation (REC), which represents suppliers of agency workers, has previously described the proposals as “unworkable”.
The Lords Committee charged with scrutinising the legislation said “the lack of robust evidence and the expected limited net benefit raise questions as to the practical effectiveness and benefit” of the new rules.
TUC General Secretary Paul Nowaksaid: “This defeat is a badge of shame for the Conservatives, who have been found guilty of breaching the law.
“Bringing in less-qualified agency staff to deliver important services risks endangering public safety, worsening disputes and poisoning industrial relations.
“The government railroaded through this law change despite widespread opposition from agency employers and unions. The courts even found ministers ignored evidence that the measure would be counterproductive.
“This is the same reckless approach behind the anti-strike bill, which has faced a barrage of criticism from employers, rights groups and international bodies, and which has been amended by the House of Lords on three separate occasions during parliamentary ping-pong.
“Ministers should spare themselves further embarrassment. These cynical strike-breaking agency worker laws must be scrapped once and for all – and the draconian anti-strike bill must be junked for good too.”
Richard Arthur, head of trade union law, Thompson solicitors added: “This is a significant victory for the entire trade union movement and preserves a vital safeguard in ensuring the right to participate in industrial action is effective.
“The judgment makes clear that the then Secretary of State (above) had a staggering disregard to his legal obligations when introducing legislation that enabled employers to engage agency workers to cover the duties of striking workers.
“He was driven solely by a political ideology to meet a self-imposed deadline to implement the regulations in the face of mounting industrial action across the country.
“He took this decision notwithstanding advice he received that it was likely to be counter-productive to the problem he wanted to address and was being rushed through without any regard being taken to the duty to consult which was a fundamental legal requirement.
“This is bad law-making made on the hoof and the Court has rightly held the Government to account.”
Members of the Educational Institute of Scotland – Further Education Lecturers’ Association (EIS-FELA) at Edinburgh College yesterday took the first in a series of days of strike action in response to compulsory redundancies at the College.
The EIS-FELA Branch at Edinburgh College has had an active strike mandate in place for some weeks in pursuit of a dispute regarding compulsory redundancies, which has been successful in reducing the number of jobs under threat, through negotiation.
The EIS wrote to the College Principal last week urging further talks. Despite this, the College has rejected the appeal of one member of the lecturing staff against compulsory redundancy as of 30th June.
EIS General Secretary, Andrea Bradley said, “The EIS-FELA Branch at Edinburgh College has been left with no option but to proceed with strike action today in the face of wilful intransigence by the management of the College.
“Given the size and scope of Edinburgh College as an organisation, the EIS would have anticipated meaningful discussions and offers of retraining or upskilling for the colleague who faces unemployment as of Friday.
“Despite retraining or upskilling being raised on several occasions by EIS representatives, and despite a so-called recruitment freeze having been abandoned, these discussions have not taken place, thereby limiting suitable alternatives to redundancy for the colleague who also happens to be an EIS Branch Rep.”
Ms Bradley continued: “It is difficult to fathom how such a large college, which delivers such an array of courses, would be unable to avoid this redundancy situation, especially as teaching hours seem to be available on college timetables for next term, based upon information received by the EIS.
“Spurious excuse after excuse has been made by the College as to why the work cannot be offered to the lecturer in question, appearing that the College cares more about targeting union reps and testing the water on compulsory redundancies of lecturers in the sector rather than ensuring the delivery of quality education and Fair Work for lecturing staff.
“The Scottish Government is culpable in this situation too. They have dealt major blows to Further Education in Scotland in the form of flat cash funding settlements and the recent withdrawal of £26 million of funding for FE.
“Lower than predicted student numbers, coupled with the cost-of-living crisis are also causing financial strain within the sector, yet the Scottish Government has sat back and watched these pressures mount towards the implementation of limited voluntary severance schemes and the very real threat of large numbers of compulsory redundancies in two colleges – City of Glasgow and Edinburgh.
“EIS-FELA, supported by the EIS itself, will not stand by and allow the livelihoods of our members to be threatened in this way. Strike action will continue post-summer unless an acceptable resolution can be reached.
“In the case of Edinburgh College, this should not be anything like the problem that the College has chosen to make it.”
‘Early grip’ of budget to ensure best value for residents
The City of Edinburgh Council has begun budget setting early in an extra effort to ‘futureproof the services which matter most to residents and deliver them more efficiently’.
A report published this week outlines high level proposals for how the council will ‘innovate to lower costs and provide best value for the people of Edinburgh’ when it sets its next budget.
As it is developed further, the Financial Strategy and Medium-Term Financial Plan will provide a forward look and action plan to address the city’s longer-term financial challenge – while staying true to Edinburgh’s core values, priorities, and commitments made in the council’s business plan.
With a focus on improving services where possible rather than reducing them, the initial proposals are based on:
An assumed Council Tax rise of at least 3 per cent;
A programme of internal change involving a new system to better support HR activities;
More efficient use of Community Transport;
Exploring new income and trading opportunities;
Making the best use of the council’s estate so that it has fewer but better buildings;
Managing contracts and partnerships more efficiently and at lower cost;
Driving down costs by embracing digital solutions.
This early planning comes just a few months after Councillors controversially agreed a Lib-Dem budget for 2023/24 set against a backdrop of real-terms reductions in core government grant funding.
Councillor Mandy Watt, Finance and Resources Convener, said:We’re proud of our commitment to making Edinburgh a greener and fairer city, and to getting the basics right. And we’re equally proud of our track record of strong financial management. This strategic approach prepares us for the challenges that we’ll face over the coming years.
“The work we do now will pave the way for protecting and enhancing our investment in Edinburgh’s future, which we’ve committed to in the council’s Business Plan. We need to make this investment, whilst also prioritising the day-to-day services residents say matter most to them right now.
“Local authorities have suffered a decade of continuous real term income cuts from central government and Edinburgh is no exception. In fact, Edinburgh remains the lowest funded council per head in Scotland, despite the unique pressures which come with being Scotland’s capital city – our projected population growth, the climate crisis, and our well documented housing shortage.
“The Scottish Government could do more to support Edinburgh. Fast tracking the Transient Visitor Levy, and allowing councils to decide what to use the income for, would make a huge difference to our finances.
“I know that financial planning can cause concerns, particularly amongst our workers, so I want to make it absolutely clear that I remain committed to the council’s longstanding approach to no-compulsory redundancies.
“A further report re-affirming this will be brought to a meeting of the Policy and Sustainability Committee in August and we will continue to engage with Trade Unions throughout the ongoing budget process.”
A key factor in the bid to end poverty in the Capital by 2030 is the steps being taken by the Council and partners to prevent and mitigate the impacts on women.
This is closely linked to child poverty, given there is a proportionately high share of caring responsibilities adopted by women in general – 90% of lone parents are women, 38% of those in Scotland live in poverty.
Women have also been disproportionately affected by the cost of living crisis and, alongside childcare, these patterns are strongly driven by gender inequalities in the workplace. Women account for 60% of all low paid workers in Edinburgh and 78% of all part time workers.
In response to these challenges, actions in the Council’s End Poverty in Edinburgh Delivery Plan, and other plans, which are expected to prevent or mitigate the impact of poverty on women and girls, include:
Raising awareness of the gender impacts of poverty
Helping to increase incomes for women in poverty
Reducing the costs and impact of childcare responsibilities
Council Leader Cammy Day said: “Tackling poverty is one of our key priorities as a Council and our 2030 target is ambitious but one I’m convinced can be achieved. We have to act decisively if we’re to eradicate poverty in Edinburgh.
“It’s a fact that women are more likely to experience poverty and thus it was important that we had a separate update on specific actions being taken to help to further highlight this issue.
“It’s also of course not just the material constraints of living in poverty that make things hard, it’s the emotional strain and it is important that we do all we can to tackle this.
“This update on actions currently underway was well received by councillors who fully support the work of the End Poverty in Edinburgh Delivery Plan which gives an important overview of where we are. We know that we can’t achieve our goals in insolation.
“That’s why we are working with partners such as the End Poverty Edinburgh citizen’s group who help us make sure that the real experiences of people who live in poverty are at the centre of shaping the actions we take to tackle poverty and inequality in the capital city.
“Analysis of these actions will be continued, and I look forward to the update on the wider End Poverty in Edinburgh progress later in the year where will look at all households and priority groups.”
NO Poverty concerns for one new council employee. Edinburgh’s interim Director of Adult Social Care will be paid no less than £403,390 A YEAR!
I’m sure that will go down really well with the capital’s care workers, the majority of whom are women! – Ed.
May Day is a unique occasion in our calendar. It’s when we celebrate the bonds that unite workers and trade unionists across the world. When we reflect on our shared values of equality, justice and solidarity. And when we remember the huge advances won by the collective struggles of working people (writes TUC General Secretary PAUL NOWAK).
And this year, May Day has a special resonance. The cost-of-living crisis shows few signs of easing. Food prices are now rising at almost 20 per cent, hitting the poorest hardest. And across the economy, in both private and public sectors, hundreds of thousands of workers are striking for fair pay. I’ve been proud to visit scores of picket lines, meeting inspirational reps and workers, many on strike for the first time. Unions don’t accept we have to become poorer.
In the public sector, the government is refusing to deliver decent pay rises for the workers it lauded as heroes during the pandemic. Ministers had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the negotiating table following industrial action by health and education unions. But they are still failing to negotiate in the civil service – and the TUC will resist any attempts to play one group of workers against another.
Meanwhile, in the private sector, unions have been winning some impressive deals for their members. And a special mention to workers at Amazon in Coventry, who have been taking historic strike action for fair pay and union recognition.
But as workers fight for a fair deal, the Conservative government is attacking our right to strike. Their Anti Strikes Bill is undemocratic, unworkable and probably unlawful. It makes the UK an international outlier by imposing yet more draconian restrictions and penalties on unions.
Small wonder the legislation has been condemned by employment law experts and, earlier this week, by over 100 politicians worldwide. And on Wednesday, Labour, Lib Dem and crossbench peers in the House of Lords defeated the government four times on the bill.
That’s why the TUC has called an emergency “reject and repeal” protest outside Parliament to coincide with the final Commons votes on the bill. We can’t be sure about exact dates just yet, but it’s likely to be sometime in mid May.
Full details will be posted on our website as soon as possible. This is a big opportunity for us to put our concerns firmly in the political, media and public spotlight.
As working families struggle to stay afloat, those at the top are raking it in. Chief executives continue to trouser massive pay packages. Shareholder dividends have gone up three times faster than wages. And bankers in the City of London have just enjoyed the biggest bonus round since the crash. Britain is increasingly unequal: as hospitals set up food banks to feed their own staff, Porsche dealers report record sales.
Instead, we need an economy that rewards work not wealth. The TUC is demanding fair taxes, including a proper windfall tax on obscene energy profits. We want a £15 minimum wage, better pensions and a boost to Universal Credit. And we want stronger collective bargaining rights for unions, so we can win fair pay for all and ensure the gains of tech change and AI are shared fairly.
We’re also campaigning for political change and the election of a new government on a worker- and union-friendly manifesto. But whatever happens, we must rebuild our collective strength, advancing our membership and organisation right across the economy.
My overwhelming priority remains to build a stronger, more diverse, more inclusive movement. And whether it’s fighting racism, rooting out sexual harassment or resisting the government’s spiteful Illegal Migration Bill, there’s plenty we can do. This May Day, let’s resolve to fight for all working people, in all our wonderful diversity. Ultimately, that’s the best way to win the change we need.
Following the shambles of this year’s City of Edinburgh Council budget in which full council voted for a budget including privatisation and compulsory redundancies, Edinburgh’s trade unions have joined together to demand better for the workforce and the community.
GMB, Unison, and Unite represent the majority of workers employed across the council including front line services such as waste, care, parks and roads, and non-teaching staff in schools.
The joint trade unions welcome the council leader’s assurances he has no intention of implementing the budget in full, but this is not enough and are further calling on City of Edinburgh Council to give their workforce security by re-setting a budget which takes compulsory redundancies and privatisation off the cards completely.
The joint trade unions are asking the public to stand by the council workforce, by signing the public petition and writing to their local councillors: https://edcouncilpledge.carrd.co/
GMB Organiser Kirsten Muat Said: “Scotland’s council’s have been underfunded for decades, but it is unacceptable of the council to ask front line workers to bear the brunt of the lack of political leadership on this issue.
“The workforce need to be given job security, the only way this can happen is by political leaders putting their words into action and putting a complete to stop to any privatisation or compulsory redundancies.
“Privatization and redundancies will never be in the public interest, it would be wrong and short sighted for City of Edinburgh Council to pursue this.”
UNISON Branch Secretary Tom Connolly said: “We want all Edinburgh Councillors to not only adopt the trade union pledge, but we also want them to publicly endorse their commitment and outline how they will ensure our pledges are delivered.
“The public have a massive role to play here too. You can help save our services by using our campaign tools to write to your elected officials and put pressure on them to deliver.
“The Edinburgh Council unions have continually warned over many years about the devastating impact of cuts to council budgets and the threat to democratic accountability.
But under the Tory Government at Westminster and the SNP/Green Government in Scotland, local government is under pressure as never before. For years now, council workers have continuously been asked to do more with less and deliver more for less. With the current council budget, that trend will continue, and things will continue to get worse.”
Unite branch secretary Brian Robertson said: “The council needs to provide security to its workers as insecurity for the workers not only causes stress to them and their families but also puts stress on the services they deliver.
“Best Value reviews must examine in-house service delivery as a serious option. Improving Services, Creating Jobs is the Best Value our council can give to our workers, citizens, families and communities. Doing otherwise is a dis-service to our city.”
Experts say government’s Strikes Bill will make Britain an international “outlier” on union laws
Unions will be forced to “undermine” their own strikes, lawyers say
Leading employment lawyers have warned that government’s new Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill will give ministers “unfettered power” to restrict the right to strike.
In a joint statement, the legal specialists say the new legislation will make Britain “an outlier” on strike laws compared to other European and Western democracies.
Those adding their names to the statement include:
Alan Bogg, Professor of Labour Law, University of Bristol
Keith Ewing, Professor of Public Law, King’s College London
Ruth Dukes, Professor of Labour Law, University of Glasgow
Highlighting the new sweeping powers the Bill will give to ministers, the lawyers say:
“The legislation gives a Secretary of State a largely unfettered power to determine what a minimum level of service should be in a particular service, and consequently the circumstances in which and the extent to which workers in these sectors can lawfully exercise their freedom to strike.”
Highlighting how Britain risks becoming an international outlier on strike laws, the lawyers say:
“The Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill would place an unacceptable restriction on a worker’s right to take strike action to defend their terms and conditions of employment. It adds to an existing body of highly restrictive laws on strikes, including the Trade Union Act 2016.
“It would make Great Britain an outlier among comparable countries. If ministers are keen to learn from overseas, a more promising place to start would be the creation of a culture of social dialogue and balanced cooperation through the introduction of sector-wide collective bargaining, together with the clear legal recognition of a positive right to strike.”
Highlighting the strain the Bill will put on industrial relations, the lawyers say:
“Trade unions will be required by an employer acting with the authority of the state to take steps actively to undermine its own strike, for which its members will have voted in a ballot with high thresholds of support. Such an obligation is unprecedented in British law, and it places trade unions in an intolerable conflict with their own members.
“The legislation also removes significant protections for individual workers exposing them to the risk of dismissal and victimisation. It will do nothing to resolve the current spate of industrial action, which will be settled by negotiation and agreement, rather than by the introduction of even tighter restrictions on trade unions.”
The TUC has accused the government of ducking scrutiny over the Bill.
If passed, the Strikes Bill will mean that when workers democratically and lawfully vote to strike they can be forced to work and sacked if they don’t comply.
The Bill gives ministers power to impose new minimum service levels through regulation.
But consultations on how these regulations will work in specific services have not been completed, and parliamentarians have been given few details on how minimum service levels are intended to operate.
The TUC says the new legislation will “do nothing” to solve the current disputes across the public sector, and “only make matters worse”.
Alan Bogg, Professor of Labour Law at the University of Bristol said: “This Bill would risk leaving Britain an international outlier in its restrictive laws on trade unions.
“When combined with existing legislation, these proposals constitute a further departure from established norms and international treaty obligations.
“Rather than bringing Britain into line with other European countries, it deviates significantly from the legal traditions of our neighbours where the right to strike is often given explicit constitutional protection.”
Ruth Dukes, Professor of Labour Law at the University of Glasgow said: “These minimum service requirements will do nothing to help workers and employers reach agreement.
“But they might well prolong and inflame disputes.”
Commenting on the lawyers’ letter, TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said: “This is a damning assessment of the government’s Strikes Bill. Make no mistake – these new laws are a naked power grab that will allow ministers to severely restrict the right to strike.
“This spiteful legislation would mean that when workers democratically vote to strike, they can be forced to work and sacked if they don’t comply.
“Compulsory work notices during strikes will place a huge strain on employer and union relations and will do nothing to help resolve disputes.
“If this nasty legislation gets on to the statute book, the TUC will fight it all the way – including through the courts.
“The Conservatives cannot legislate away worker dissatisfaction.”
The full statement reads:
We the undersigned are specialists in employment law.
Between us we have decades of experience as academics and practitioners in analysing the existing statutory regime for industrial action and the wider industrial relations landscape in Great Britain and internationally.
In our view the Strikes Bill (Minimum Service Levels) Act would place an unacceptable restriction on a worker’s right to take strike action to defend their terms and conditions of employment. It adds to an existing body of highly restrictive laws on strikes, including the Trade Union Act 2016. The cumulative effects of this legislation would place the UK well outside the mainstream of industrial relations in comparable countries.
The right to strike is guaranteed in international law by a succession of important treaties. These include the Council of Europe’s Social Charter of 1961; and the UN’s International Covenant on economic, social and cultural rights of 1966. It has also been recognised as a human right by the International Labour Organisation, and by the European Court of Human Rights. Our obligation to respect ILO conventions and the Social Charter was reinforced by the 2020 Trade and Cooperation Treaty with the European Union.
In Great Britain the right to strike is already heavily limited. The statutory regime places significant requirements on trade unions contemplating industrial action including the need to conduct a postal ballot under highly complex rules, the need to clear high thresholds of support (even higher in ‘important public services’), and to give 14 days’ notice of action.
The Strikes Bill as drafted would remove none of these requirements while placing a hugely onerous new set of requirements on unions and union members.
The legislation gives a Secretary of State a largely unfettered power to determine what a minimum level of service should be in a particular service, and consequently the circumstances in which and the extent to which workers in these sectors can lawfully exercise their freedom to strike. If a strike takes place in these services, an employer will have the power to issue a work notice effectively to requisition workers during the strike.
Trade unions will then be under a duty to take “reasonable steps” to ensure that workers comply with the work notice. Trade unions will thus be required by an employer acting with the authority of the state to take steps actively to undermine its own strike, for which its members will have voted in a ballot with high thresholds of support. Such an obligation is unprecedented in British law, and it places trade unions in an intolerable conflict with their own members.
The legislation also removes significant protections for individual workers exposing them to the risk of dismissal and victimisation. It will do nothing to resolve the current spate of industrial action, which will be settled by negotiation and agreement, rather than by the introduction of even tighter restrictions on trade unions.
The proposed minimum service legislation constitutes a further departure from established norms and treaty obligations. It would make Great Britain an outlier among comparable countries. If ministers are keen to learn from overseas, a more promising place to start would be the creation of a culture of social dialogue and balanced cooperation through the introduction of sector-wide collective bargaining, together with the clear legal recognition of a positive right to strike.
Professor Alan Bogg, Professor of Labour Law, University of Bristol
Professor Nicola Countouris, Director of the Research Department, European Trade Union Institute (ETUI) and Professor in Labour Law and European Law, University College London
Professor Ruth Dukes, Professor of Labour Law, University of Glasgow
Professor Keith Ewing, Professor of Public Law, King’s College London
Professor Lydia Hayes, Professor of Labour Rights, University of Liverpool
Dr Ioannis Katsaroumpas, Lecturer in Employment Law, University of Sussex
Professor Aristea Koukiadaki, Professor of Labour Law and Industrial Relations, Head of The University of Manchester Law School
Professor Virginia Mantouvalou, Professor of Human Rights and Labour Law, University College London
Dr Ewan McGaughey, Reader in Law, King’s College London
Professor Tonia Novitz, Professor of Labour Law, University of Bristol
At this time (1950) a petition had been launched to collect signatures against the proliferatation of nuclear weapons. We in the union branch at the New Cross tram depot decided to set up a Peace Committee to collect signatures for the Stockholm Peace Appeal.
The Cold War was intensely pursued by the Western powers. Charlie CHaplin was thron out of America and Paul Robeson too.
We had a big meeting in Camberwell to support Paul Robeson, to which he sent a recorded message, but we were up against the full wight of an anti-communist media.
I even stood as one of three candidates for the Communist Party local elections in Debtford, as their proposals seemed at the time to best address the needs of ordinary working people. But this was at the time of the Yangtse incident, where the Chinese communists were fired on by a British warship and the McCarthy era in the United States was in full swing.
The Vauxhall Tram authorities gave permission for a stall to be set up for just one day in the garage – and we were successful in collecting over 900 signatures for the Stockholm Peace Appeal, which I delivered to their offices near Regent’s Park.
I would collect the Daily Worker newspaper before my shift and do leafletting after my shifts, early morning or late. The shifts were spaced such that it was impossible to go home in between shifts. They were long days away from home.
Over the seven years I was active in the Transport and General Workers Union we were always under pressure and the canteen was a hive of activity with the early morning sales of all kinds of newspapers. We had to prove we were selling all papers inside the garage and not just the Daily Worker – this we did from outside the garage!
Then we were banned from selling the paper when we had tram uniforms on. The attempts at control were relentless.
There were of course already some big improvements such as improved provision if social services and the formation of the National Health Service in 1948; it is hard today to imagine not having an NHS and having to pay to see a doctor.
I knew that improvements to the lives of ordinary working people would have to be fought for by ordinary people like me and the hundreds of thousands of people who were now finding ways of making progress through sound argument and political pressure.
This was the challenge of winning a better future for everyone and pursuing this has been my lifelong ambition.
Progress is never guaranteed and things are sometimes disappointing, but I have seen poverty, war and destructive chaos and I know that only through ordinary working people struggling together will the devastating evils of poverty and war be avoided in the future.
The STUC, along with the TUC, are coordinating a protect the right to strike day today (Wednesday 1 February).
PM Rishi Sunak is trying to force his anti-union “sack key workers bill” through parliament in a matter of weeks. It means that when workers democratically vote to strike, they could be forced to work and sacked if they don’t.
That’s wrong, unworkable, and almost certainly illegal. We need to stop this bill.
These new laws are a direct attack on working people’s fundamental right to strike to defend their pay, terms and conditions.
EDINBURGH
Edinburgh Day of Action
The Day of Action for Edinburgh will consist of three events:
Rally in the Mound at noon particularly for the PCS DWP members who will be on strike that day;
Indoor rally in the Southside Community Centre at 1.00pm/1.30pm.
Rally in the Mound at 5.00pm particularly for EIS members.
Solidarity with worker striking on the 1st February
Join our solidarity rally. Scottish workers in the civil service, higher education, some schools, some rail operators and Co-op Funeral Care will all be taking industrial action on 1st.
Join our joint strike rally at the Donald Dewar Steps, Buchanan Street at 12 noon.
